### Abstract

Purpose: This study quantifies the effect of scanning speed on photon beam profiles and PDD measurements in a water tank. Methods: Data was acquired using OmniPro‐Accept 7 (IBA Dosimetry) for Varian TruebeamTM, 6 MV and 6 FFF, 3×3 and 10×10 cm^{2} fields. A CC13 compact chamber (Wellhofer) and an EDGE Detector (Sun Nuclear) were used to measure PDD, inline and crossline profiles (at dmax and 10 cm depths) in a Blue Phantom^{2} (IBA Dosimetry). Each scan was acquired five times at ten different scanning speeds [0.35 – 2.50 cm/sec], and compared to a reference scan (discrete steps of 1.0 mm/step, 2 sec/step). MATLAB was used to calculate the mean difference between the reference and scanned data, and the standard deviation, at each measured point in the scan. Results: For the CC13, the mean difference and the standard deviation of the measured PDDs increased with increasing scan speed for all field sizes and energies. The range of mean differences for speeds below 1.0 cm/sec was [0.04% — 0.13%], and above 1.5 cm/sec was [0.13% — 0.30%].For the EDGE detector, the mean difference and the standard deviation of the PDDs also increased with increasing scan speed. The range of mean differences for speeds below 1.0 cm/sec was [0.09% — 0.28%], and above 1.5 cm/sec was [0.21% — 0.57%].The mean difference for in‐field profile scans did not show significant dependence on scanning speed for either detector. The range of mean differences was [0.08% — 0.99%] for the CC13, and [0.13% — 2.16%] for the EDGE. Conclusion: Increased scanning speed was correlated with an increase in the mean difference of PDD curves. The mean difference for in‐field profile scans did not show significant dependence on scanning speed for either detector. The EDGE scan data exhibited larger mean difference for all scan types.

Original language | English (US) |
---|---|

Number of pages | 1 |

Journal | Medical Physics |

Volume | 40 |

Issue number | 6 |

DOIs | |

State | Published - Jan 1 2013 |

Externally published | Yes |

### Fingerprint

### ASJC Scopus subject areas

- Biophysics
- Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

### Cite this

*Medical Physics*,

*40*(6). https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4814566

**SU‐E‐T‐131 : Effect of Scanning Speed On MV and FFF Dosimetric Measurements Using a Scanning Chamber and EDGE Detector.** / Sayler, E.; Gardner, S.; Buzurovic, I.; Studenski, Matthew Thomas.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article

*Medical Physics*, vol. 40, no. 6. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4814566

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - SU‐E‐T‐131

T2 - Effect of Scanning Speed On MV and FFF Dosimetric Measurements Using a Scanning Chamber and EDGE Detector

AU - Sayler, E.

AU - Gardner, S.

AU - Buzurovic, I.

AU - Studenski, Matthew Thomas

PY - 2013/1/1

Y1 - 2013/1/1

N2 - Purpose: This study quantifies the effect of scanning speed on photon beam profiles and PDD measurements in a water tank. Methods: Data was acquired using OmniPro‐Accept 7 (IBA Dosimetry) for Varian TruebeamTM, 6 MV and 6 FFF, 3×3 and 10×10 cm2 fields. A CC13 compact chamber (Wellhofer) and an EDGE Detector (Sun Nuclear) were used to measure PDD, inline and crossline profiles (at dmax and 10 cm depths) in a Blue Phantom2 (IBA Dosimetry). Each scan was acquired five times at ten different scanning speeds [0.35 – 2.50 cm/sec], and compared to a reference scan (discrete steps of 1.0 mm/step, 2 sec/step). MATLAB was used to calculate the mean difference between the reference and scanned data, and the standard deviation, at each measured point in the scan. Results: For the CC13, the mean difference and the standard deviation of the measured PDDs increased with increasing scan speed for all field sizes and energies. The range of mean differences for speeds below 1.0 cm/sec was [0.04% — 0.13%], and above 1.5 cm/sec was [0.13% — 0.30%].For the EDGE detector, the mean difference and the standard deviation of the PDDs also increased with increasing scan speed. The range of mean differences for speeds below 1.0 cm/sec was [0.09% — 0.28%], and above 1.5 cm/sec was [0.21% — 0.57%].The mean difference for in‐field profile scans did not show significant dependence on scanning speed for either detector. The range of mean differences was [0.08% — 0.99%] for the CC13, and [0.13% — 2.16%] for the EDGE. Conclusion: Increased scanning speed was correlated with an increase in the mean difference of PDD curves. The mean difference for in‐field profile scans did not show significant dependence on scanning speed for either detector. The EDGE scan data exhibited larger mean difference for all scan types.

AB - Purpose: This study quantifies the effect of scanning speed on photon beam profiles and PDD measurements in a water tank. Methods: Data was acquired using OmniPro‐Accept 7 (IBA Dosimetry) for Varian TruebeamTM, 6 MV and 6 FFF, 3×3 and 10×10 cm2 fields. A CC13 compact chamber (Wellhofer) and an EDGE Detector (Sun Nuclear) were used to measure PDD, inline and crossline profiles (at dmax and 10 cm depths) in a Blue Phantom2 (IBA Dosimetry). Each scan was acquired five times at ten different scanning speeds [0.35 – 2.50 cm/sec], and compared to a reference scan (discrete steps of 1.0 mm/step, 2 sec/step). MATLAB was used to calculate the mean difference between the reference and scanned data, and the standard deviation, at each measured point in the scan. Results: For the CC13, the mean difference and the standard deviation of the measured PDDs increased with increasing scan speed for all field sizes and energies. The range of mean differences for speeds below 1.0 cm/sec was [0.04% — 0.13%], and above 1.5 cm/sec was [0.13% — 0.30%].For the EDGE detector, the mean difference and the standard deviation of the PDDs also increased with increasing scan speed. The range of mean differences for speeds below 1.0 cm/sec was [0.09% — 0.28%], and above 1.5 cm/sec was [0.21% — 0.57%].The mean difference for in‐field profile scans did not show significant dependence on scanning speed for either detector. The range of mean differences was [0.08% — 0.99%] for the CC13, and [0.13% — 2.16%] for the EDGE. Conclusion: Increased scanning speed was correlated with an increase in the mean difference of PDD curves. The mean difference for in‐field profile scans did not show significant dependence on scanning speed for either detector. The EDGE scan data exhibited larger mean difference for all scan types.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024798823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024798823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.4814566

DO - 10.1118/1.4814566

M3 - Article

VL - 40

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 6

ER -